Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756277AbXJ0OVn (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:21:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751476AbXJ0OVe (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:21:34 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:46253 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755414AbXJ0OVd (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:21:33 -0400 Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 07:17:06 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven To: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Cc: Jeff Garzik , Andrew Morton , "Salyzyn, Mark" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ebiederm@xmission.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] irq-remove: scsi driver trivial Message-ID: <20071027071706.0ce9cb9f@laptopd505.fenrus.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20071019075443.GA6407@havoc.gtf.org> <20071019075808.GH6407@havoc.gtf.org> <20071026143525.b9218ed7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4722608E.3000405@garzik.org> <20071026165035.33383e36@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <47228278.8070505@garzik.org> <20071026171606.4e242f49@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <4722885B.7050307@garzik.org> <20071026223137.5e311481@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <4722E360.7000305@garzik.org> Organization: Intel X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1221 Lines: 37 On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 01:46:15 -0600 ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote: > >>> > >> > >> yeah and THEY can put the defines in (RH used to do this fwiw as a > >> generic "this is a RH kernel" define).... > >> > >> but afaik no distro vendor backports such an api change > >> nowadays... and hasn't in 2.6 ever > > > > People backport drivers all the time that must support a wide range > > of kernels. > > I thought the argument was not that drivers are back ported but that > internal kernel APIs changes aren't backported. exactly > So that testing > the kernel version actually has a chance as a reasonable test for > features. or at least for this level of API change For this specific change, I don't see ANY distro just backporting this ... so a version test is just fine for this change imo. -- If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/